ArticleScientific reports2017
The reference frame of the tilt aftereffect measured by differential Pavlovian conditioning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neural Evidence for Boundary Updating as the Source of the Repulsive Bias in Classification.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023Article
- Spatiotopic updating across saccades in the absence of awareness.Journal of vision · 2021Article
- A review of interactions between peripheral and foveal vision.Journal of vision · 2020Review
- Time course of spatiotopic updating across saccades.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We used a differential Pavlovian conditioning paradigm to measure tilt aftereffect (TAE) strength. Gabor patches, rotated clockwise and anticlockwise, were used as conditioned stimuli (CSs), one of which (CS+) was followed by the unconditioned stimulus (UCS), whereas the other (CS-) appeared alone. The UCS was an air puff delivered to the left eye. In addition to the CS+ and CS-, the vertical test patch was also presented for the clockwise and anticlockwise adapters. The vertical patch was not followed by the UCS. After participants acquired differential conditioning, eyeblink conditioned responses (CRs) were observed for the vertical patch when it appeared to be tilted in the same direction as the CS+ owing to the TAE. The effect was observed not only when the adapter and test stimuli were presented in the same retinotopic position but also when they were presented in the same spatiotopic position, although spatiotopic TAE was weak-it occurred approximately half as often as the full effect. Furthermore, spatiotopic TAE decayed as the time after saccades increased, but did not decay as the time before saccades increased. These results suggest that the time before the performance of saccadic eye movements is needed to compute the spatiotopic representation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.